What I personally find most interesting about this article is the demonstration of purely human insight.
We're used to new techniques and new discoveries, but many of them seem obvious, just yet unimplemented. What the author does in the article, on the other hand, is just completely brilliant deductive logic.
From my logic studies ten years ago I recall that an argument is considered 'Valid' if true premises must lead to a true conclusion (ie, no gaps in the logic); to be 'Sound', however, it must be Valid and have true premises.
This seems Valid to me so far. I guess the peer review (formal and crowd-sourced) will test for Soundness.
We're used to new techniques and new discoveries, but many of them seem obvious, just yet unimplemented. What the author does in the article, on the other hand, is just completely brilliant deductive logic.